Monday, March 28, 2016

Sociopaths in Science


Last night I was reading Jacob Darwin Hamblin's excellent Arming Mother Nature: The Birth of Catastrophic Environmentalism.

I strongly recommend the entire book. Last night I was focusing on Hamblin's historical account of debates occurring in the 1950s over whether or not atmospheric testing was impacting the weather.

Hamblin demonstrates that US meteorologists adamantly rejected the idea that atomic testing could have caused the highly unusual weather patterns in 1955 and 1956 despite considerable evidence suggesting potential impacts.

In the early 1960s, scientists working with the defense industry became more open to the idea that human action could geo-engineer the climate.

Hamblin describes these scientists' debates about the survivability of "total" nuclear war and their ideas for developing non-nuclear climate-altering weapons that might have more tactical impact, with less total destruction, than nuclear bombs.

According to Hamblin's account, J. F. Kennedy was concerned about the implication of these efforts to geo-engineer the climate and natural terrain, as illustrated by this passage warning Americans of the dangers of scientific experimentation:
"For, as science investigates the natural environment, it also modifies it--and that modification may have incalculable consequences, for evil as well as for good. . . . [S]cience tody has the power for the first time in history to undertake experiments with premeditation which can irreversibly alter our biological and physical environment on a global scale." (cited p. 147)

Kennedy secretly directed his cabinet to guarantee that any future experimentation with significant impacts would be reviewed at the highest levels of government.

Hamblin's account is really quite chilling. The scientists engaged in plotting earth's destruction were quite clearly collectively insane.

They were blinded by group think. They viewed the earth as infinitely "resilient." They did not incorporate impacts on DNA. They viewed total war as survivable. They were collectively psychotic and their legacy was institutionalized in our military-industrial-scientific complexes.

The scientists plotting the survivability of total war in the 1950s and 1960s are of the same ilk who promote "tactical" nuclear weapons use today. They are of the same ilk as those who claim that Fukushima took no lives and will have little-to-no measurable impact on health or reproduction.

I know what is wrong with these people because my father was a sociopath and I've come to recognize how they operate, how they deploy their strategies and tactics of disregard and dispossession.

The unfortunate reality is that sociopaths such as Teller can be seductive and their distorted truths can become the basis for scientific consensus, group-think, and institutional capture.

That happened during the Cold War and it is happening today with the myriad examples of crimes against humanity and the natural environment, as illustrated here:

Exclusive: Navy Secretly Conducting Electromagnetic Warfare Training on Washington Roads

Monday, 07 March 2016 00:00 By Dahr Jamail, Truthout | Report


Little noticed amid the daily news bulletins about the Islamic State and Syria, the Pentagon has begun a push for exotic new weapons that can deter Russia and China.

Pentagon officials have started talking openly about using the latest tools of artificial intelligence and machine learning to create robot weapons, “human-machine teams” and enhanced, super-powered soldiers….  Within the Pentagon, this high-tech approach is known by the dull phrase “third offset strategy,” emulating two earlier “offsets” that checked Russian military advances during the Cold War. The first offset was tactical nuclear weapons; the second was precision-guided conventional weapons. The latest version assumes that smart, robot weapons can help restore deterrence that has been eroded by Russian and Chinese progress.

Two additional examples of nuclear insanity: http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2016/03/two-excellent-reads-on-nuclear-insanity.html



MEANWHILE, FUKUSHIMA STILL LOOKING BAD